We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Firepower has been used for quite a few enterprise clients. Most of our clients are Fortune 500 and Firepower is used to improve their end to end firewall functionality."
"Provides good integrations and reporting."
"I have experience with URL filtering, and it is very good for URL filtering. You can filter URLs based on the categories, and it does a good job. It can also do deep packet inspection."
"The feature set is fine and is rarely a problem."
"The most valuable feature is the access control list (ACL)."
"One of the most valuable features of Firepower 7.0 is the "live log" type feature called Unified Event Viewer. That view has been really good in helping me get to data faster, decreasing the amount of time it takes to find information, and allowing me to fix problems faster. I've found that to be incredibly valuable because it's a lot easier to get to some points of data now."
"If configured, Firepower provides us with application visibility and control."
"You do not have to do everything through a command line which makes it a lot easier to apply rules."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"A valuable feature is that the solution is open source."
"A free firewall that is a good network security appliance."
"It's a good solution for end-users. It's pretty easy to work with."
"The documentation is very good."
"The solution is very robust."
"The scalability is very good, where you can do an HA configuration and then bring in another box, if necessary."
"I mostly like all of it. Whatever we use is valuable."
"The solution offers good sandboxing."
"Once you have Zscaler running you have access to configure it however you want."
"Includes advanced tech protection."
"I like the ease of deployment and its flexibility. We don't need to deal with license, quotes, procurement, delivery, and installation. Everything is software-based, and it's very easy to operate."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The initial setup was a bit complex. It wasn't a major challenge, but due to our requirements and network, it was not very straightforward but still easy enough."
"It's mainly the UI and the management parts that need improvement. The most impactful feature when you're using it is the user interface and the user experience."
"One feature I would like to see, that Firepower doesn't have, is email security. Perhaps in the future, Cisco will integrate Cisco Umbrella with Firepower. I don't see why we should have to pay for two separate products when both could be integrated in one box."
"Web filtering needs improvement because sometimes the URL is miscategorized."
"It would be great if some of the load times were faster."
"One of the few things that are brought up is that for the overall management, it would be great to have a cloud instance of that. And not only just a cloud instance, but one of the areas that we've looked at is using an HA type of cloud. To have the ability to have a device file within a cloud. If we had an issue with one, the other one would pick up automatically."
"One issue with Firepower Management Center is deployment time. It takes seven to 10 minutes and that's a long time for deployment. In that amount of time, management or someone else can ask me to change something or to provide permissions, but during that time, doing so is not possible. It's a drawback with Cisco. Other vendors, like Palo Alto or Fortinet do not have this deployment time issue."
"Report generation is an area that should be improved."
"The main problem with pfSense is that we have to use proxy solutions."
"Web interface could be enhanced and more user friendly."
"The configuration of the solution is a bit difficult."
"It could use a little bit of improvement in the reporting."
"pfSense has some limitations in detecting site sessions. We want to control internet usage based on sites and their content, and pfSense doesn't perform this function."
"The solution could use better reporting. They need to offer more of it in general. Right now, the graphics aren't the best. If you need to provide a report to a manager, for example, it doesn't look great. They need to make it easier to understand and give users the ability to customize them."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"There's a bit of a learning curve during the initial implementation."
"The issue right now is probably that Zscaler is not providing web browser isolation. Another solution, Menlo, offers this. For one customer, we had to send traffic to Menlo to do the isolation for us. It was requested by the customer so that they could integrate any iframe. Zscaler needs to add this type of feature in their next release."
"Because it's on cloud, it doesn't allow application of extra settings."
"The product could improve its integration with some legacy systems."
"It would be better if they improved their policy, package visibility, and flexibility while we're creating rules for inspection. It could also be cheaper or more things could be included in the basic package. In the next release, I would like better coverage in the Asia Pacific region and better quality of service."
"Data Leak Prevention is only for web filtering and there is no protection for email."
"I know that licensing for some of the advanced solutions, like Intrusion Prevention and Secure Malware Analytics, are nominal costs."
"Cisco, as we all know, is expensive, but for the money you are paying, you know that you are also getting top-notch documentation as well as support if needed."
"This product is expensive."
"I like the Smart Licensing, because it is more dynamic and easier to keep track of where you are at. If we have a high availability firewall pair and they are deployed in active/standby rather than active/active, I would expect that we would only pay for one set of licenses because you are using only one firewall at any one time. The other is there just for resiliency. The licensing, from a Firepower perspective, still requires you to have two licenses, even if the firewalls are in active/standby, which means that you pay for the two licenses, even though you might only be using one firewall any one time. This is probably not the best way to do it and doesn't represent the best value for money. This could be looked at to see if it could be done in a fairer way."
"This solution is expensive and other solutions, such as FortiGate, are cheaper."
"It definitely competes with the other vendors in the market."
"Its price is in the middle range. Both Firepower and FortiGate are not cheap. Palo Alto and Check Point are the cheapest ones. I don't remember any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"When we are fighting against other competitors for customers, whether it is a small or big business, we feel very comfortable with the price that Firepower has today."
"It is an open source firewall."
"I like the fact that it is open-source."
"It is open source."
"The price of pfSense is reasonable. However, there is a free version available."
"Looking at what it does, I think that it is fairly priced."
"I spent a couple of $1,000 on hardware, and the OS was free. A comparable firewall would cost me probably 20 grand. It saved a lot of money."
"pfSense is an open-source solution and free to use."
"I am using the free version of pfSense."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis. It is somewhere around 30 or 40 pounds per user for our organization."
"There are licensing costs, and I would not say that it's a cheap vendor."
Cisco NGFW firewalls deliver advanced threat defense capabilities to meet diverse needs, from
small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide
range of models, Cisco NGFW can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Advanced threat
defense capabilities include Next-generation IPS (NGIPS), Security Intelligence (SI), Advanced
Malware Protection (AMP), URL filtering, Application Visibility and Control (AVC), and flexible VPN
features. Inspect encrypted traffic and enjoy automated risk ranking and impact flags to reduce event
volume so you can quickly prioritize threats. Cisco NGFW firewalls are also available with clustering
for increased performance, high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco Firepower NGFWv is the virtualized version of Cisco's Firepower NGFW firewall. Widely
deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco NGFWv automatically scales up/down to meet
the needs of dynamic cloud environments and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco NGFWv
can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your
environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is
delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco
SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables
greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.
Zscaler enables the world’s leading organizations to securely transform their networks and applications for a mobile and cloud first world. Its flagship services, Zscaler Internet Access and Zscaler Private Access, create fast, secure connections between users and applications, regardless of device, location, or network. Zscaler services are 100% cloud-delivered and offer the simplicity, enhanced security, and improved user experience that traditional appliances or hybrid solutions are unable to match. Used in more than 185 countries, Zscaler operates the world’s largest cloud security platform, protecting thousands of enterprises and government agencies from cyberattacks and data loss.
Check more details: https://www.zscaler.com/produc...
pfSense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 54 reviews while Zscaler Cloud Firewall is ranked 29th in Firewalls with 5 reviews. pfSense is rated 8.6, while Zscaler Cloud Firewall is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of pfSense writes "Feature-rich, well documented, and there is good support available online". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Cloud Firewall writes "Good sandboxing and URL filtering with capability to scale". pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos UTM, Sophos XG and Zyxel Unified Security Gateway, whereas Zscaler Cloud Firewall is most compared with Menlo Security Cloud Firewall, OPNsense, Check Point NGFW, Cisco ASA Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate. See our Zscaler Cloud Firewall vs. pfSense report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.